BANKRUPTCY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 11056, 6 May 1899, Page 3

BANKRUPTCY.

Yesterday Charles Edward Milligan, storekeeper, of Roimiora, mado a declaration of insolvency, In his sworn slatoinont, raado before tho official assignee, ho states that on April 1, 1897, he became a partner in tho business then carried on by Andrew 11cNoill, grocer, of Newmarket. 11 was expressed that £500 should ho tho firm's capital, and lie was to contribute £250 and ft bonus of £50, taking an equal interest; anil it was further expressed that such partnership could lie determined by a six months' notion on either side. 110 paid £300 into tho ooncorn, as stipulated. McNeill kept tho books and did tho buying, etc., tho debtor doing the general work of the slore. Throughout the partnership each drew £2 10s per week for personal expenses, and in addition McNeill lived on tho premises ror.t free. Last September tho partners tunnelled, and tho debtor gave tho nix months' notice, which was to expire in March, 1899, but acting on his solicitor's advico lie letired from the business in February. In the meantime a balance-sheet was made, up by an independent party by mutual consent, tl o result being as follows:—lndebtedness, £';C3l- - 9d; stock in trade and book debts, £705 14s sd; deficiency, £326 2s 7d. His halfshare in the'figures was therefore: Indebtedness, £515 18s 6d; assets, £352 17s 2d; deficiency, £163 Is 4d. The partnership had never been formally dissolved, and tho business was still being carried on by McNeill. Debtor's solicitor had repeatedly pressed McNeill to have the estate properly wound up without avail. As ho (debtor) umlonuod, the position now was that McNeill wis demanding £163 Os Id from him—that is, cnehalf of'the deficiency shown i>y the hi'ar.eesheot. Debtor was not satisfied generally with tho balanco-sjieot, and took exception to tho following items of alleged indebtedness:—Mrs. McNeill, £102; Sargood, Son, and Ewon, £14 5s 3d; I?. T5. Froudo, £51 2s 6d; and A. McNeill, £161 2s 2d. Nos. 1 and 4 were alleged to havo boon advanced by McNeill and his wife without his (dobtor's) knowledge or consent; No. 2 represented goods supplied for McNeill's private use, and No. 3 was monoy borrowed on a promissory note given without debtor's knowledge or consent. The debtor stated that lie was absolutely without money or assets of any kind outside of the business.